Re: MTU/MSS testing IPv6

2016-05-27 Thread Torbjörn Eklöv 

> 27 maj 2016 kl. 09:46 skrev Mikael Abrahamsson :
> 
> On Fri, 27 May 2016, Matthew Luckie wrote:
> 
>> Pass it an http or https URL of an object to test against.
> 
> This is great! Good work!


I’m new on the list and I have done some work for test with traceroute with mtu 
test, icmp6 and http at https://ipv6alizer.se/
Feel free to test and comment, It’s not even an Alfa version and It’s much work 
to do with the webinterface wuth rate limit and history.

/Tobbe



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail

Re: MTU/MSS testing IPv6

2016-05-27 Thread Mikael Abrahamsson 

On Fri, 27 May 2016, Matthew Luckie wrote:


Pass it an http or https URL of an object to test against.


This is great! Good work!

tbit from 2001:df0:4:4000::1:115 to 2001:67c:2b24:1000::30
 server-mss 1380, result: pmtud-fail
 app: http, url: http://www.tullverket.se/
 [  0.010] TX SYN 64  seq = 0:0
 [  0.331] RX SYN/ACK 64  seq = 0:1
 [  0.332] TX 60  seq = 1:1
 [  0.332] TX236  seq = 1:1(176)
 [  0.652] RX 60  seq = 1:177
 [  0.664] RX608  seq = 1:177(548)   ECT
 [  0.664] RX970  seq = 549:177(910) ECT
 [  0.664] TX 60  seq = 177:549
 [  0.664] TX 60  seq = 177:1459
 [  0.665] RX   1428  seq = 1459:177(1368)   ECT
 [  0.665] RX299  seq = 2827:177(239)ECT
 [  0.665] TX PTB   1280  mtu = 1280
 [  0.669] TX 60  seq = 177:1459
 [  0.985] RX   1428  seq = 3066:177(1368)   ECT
 [  0.985] RX   1428  seq = 4434:177(1368)   ECT
 [  0.985] RX   1428  seq = 5802:177(1368)   ECT
 [  0.985] RX   1428  seq = 7170:177(1368)   ECT
 [  0.990] RX   1428  seq = 8538:177(1368)   ECT
 [  1.943] RX   1428  seq = 1459:177(1368)
 [  1.943] TX PTB   1280  mtu = 1280
 [  3.863] RX   1428  seq = 1459:177(1368)
 [  3.863] TX PTB   1280  mtu = 1280
 [  7.704] RX   1428  seq = 1459:177(1368)
 [  7.704] TX PTB   1280  mtu = 1280
 [ 15.384] RX RST 60  seq = 9906:177

Here it's clear (to me) that they're not acting on the PTB message (just 
keep resending large packtes).


Question is how could this be translated into a more easily understandable 
test with some suggestions on what might be wrong? Because if I send the 
above to someone who isn't an IPv6 expert, I'd have to include 10-20 lines 
of text to explain why above behaviour is wrong.


--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se